People v. Feliz-Lopez

2017 NY Slip Op 1002, 147 A.D.3d 871, 46 N.Y.S.3d 660
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 8, 2017
Docket2010-07237
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 1002 (People v. Feliz-Lopez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Feliz-Lopez, 2017 NY Slip Op 1002, 147 A.D.3d 871, 46 N.Y.S.3d 660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hinrichs, J.), rendered June 23, 2010, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In Padilla v Kentucky (559 US 356 [2010]), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires criminal defense counsel to advise their noncitizen clients about the risk of deportation arising from a plea of guilty. Here, the defendant contends that his counsel failed to advise him that he will be deported as a result of his guilty plea. However, the record indicates that defense counsel properly advised the defendant of the risk of deportation arising from a plea of guilty, and that the defendant was aware of that risk before he entered his plea (see People v Joseph, 142 AD3d 627 [2016]; People v Castro, 133 AD3d 986 [2015]; People v Rampersaud, 121 AD3d 721, 722-723 [2014]).

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent since he did not move to withdraw his plea on this ground prior to the imposition of sentence (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Clarke, 93 NY2d 904, 906 [1999]; People v Lujan, 114 AD3d 963, 964 [2014]). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant’s plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered.

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Balkin, J.R, Hall, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Ramos-Hernandez
2020 NY Slip Op 05780 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Tacuri
2019 NY Slip Op 5165 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. West
2017 NY Slip Op 3782 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 1002, 147 A.D.3d 871, 46 N.Y.S.3d 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-feliz-lopez-nyappdiv-2017.